/co-marketing — partner finding + joint campaign design
Find non-competing companies that share your audience and design joint campaigns. The leverage: when both sides promote, distribution roughly doubles for both — at half the asset cost.
When to invoke
- Distribution is organic-only and partner channel is untapped.
- A product launch needs amplified reach (pair with
/directory-submissions+/product-launch). - Genesys-internal cross-promotion with adjacent tools (Clay, Apollo, Smartlead, Instantly).
- Client needs joint plays with integration partners or vertical-adjacent SaaS.
Step 1 — Audience overlap analysis
The core test: does the partner serve our same buyer persona but solve a different problem? Same audience, non-competing solution.
Validate via:
- Account-overlap tools (Crossbeam, Reveal) — exact-match overlap data.
- LinkedIn job-title overlap (export both companies' followers, intersect).
- Newsletter sub-audience overlap (if both publish).
- Conference / event co-attendance.
Sharp rule: partners who share <30% audience are noise; >70% audience overlap with no competition is the gold zone.
Step 2 — 6-factor partner scoring
Score each candidate on 5 each:
| Factor | Question | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Audience fit | Same ICP, non-competing? | High |
| Size | Audience reach roughly equivalent (within 3× either direction)? | High — asymmetric partnerships are short-lived |
| Brand alignment | Voice, professionalism, ethics compatible? | Medium |
| Engagement quality | Their audience actively responds (LinkedIn comments, email open rates) — not just numbers | High |
| Reciprocity history | Have they done co-marketing before? Reliable? | Medium |
| Execution ease | Geography, timezone, calendar friction | Medium |
Total ≥ 22/30 = green-light. 18–21 = yellow (start with low-effort format). <18 = pass.
Step 3 — Campaign type selection
Order by effort (low → high) and depth (light → heavy):
| Format | Effort | Depth | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Social swap (mutual share / quote post) | Very low | Light | First partnership; brand-warm-up |
| Newsletter cross-promo (sponsored slot) | Low | Light | Audience introduction |
| Joint blog post / co-authored content | Medium | Medium | SEO + thought leadership |
| Joint webinar / panel | Medium-high | Medium | Lead capture + relationship |
| Integration play (real product integration) | High | Deep | Long-term partnership |
| Joint research report / data study | High | Deep | PR + earned media |
| Joint conference / community activation | Very high | Very deep | Established partnership |
Sharp rule: start with the lowest-effort format. Prove reciprocity, then escalate. Skipping to a research report on partnership #1 is overcommitting.
Step 4 — Structure the partnership
Document upfront, in writing:
- Lead ownership: which side keeps which leads? Default split: webinar attendees split 50/50; native-channel sign-ups stay with the channel owner.
- Promotion commitments: each side commits to N social posts, M newsletter inclusions, K direct emails.
- Asset creation responsibility: who builds the deck, who hosts, who edits the recording.
- Success metrics: registrations, attendance rate, post-event email conversion, qualified leads.
- Timeline: kickoff → promo start → event → post-event nurture handoff.
Without this written, the partnership stalls within 2 weeks.
Step 5 — Outreach template
Subject: {your_company} × {partner_company} — quick co-marketing idea
Hi {first_name},
Noticed we both serve {shared audience} — {partner's customer segment} folks who care about {shared concern}.
We just launched {your relevant artifact / content} and saw it pulled in {evidence of audience fit, e.g., "200 sign-ups from {their audience segment} in week 1"}.
I'm thinking a {specific low-effort format, e.g., "joint webinar on {topic}"} could land well with both sides. Rough shape:
- You bring {their unique angle}
- We bring {our unique angle}
- Co-promo to both lists
- Split leads 50/50
Quick call next week to scope?
— {your name}
Sharp rule: specific format + specific value > generic "let's partner". Generic asks convert at <5%; specific asks convert at 25%+.
Worked example — Genesys-internal first
Use case: joint webinar with Clay on "Cold outreach in 2026 — agent stack walkthrough".
- Audience overlap: Clay's audience = GTM engineers (~85% overlap with Genesys's audience). Non-competing — Clay enriches, we structure.
- Partner score: Audience 5 + Size 4 + Brand 5 + Engagement 5 + Reciprocity 4 + Execution 4 = 27/30. Green.
- Format: joint webinar (medium effort, medium depth — appropriate for partnership #1).
- Structure: Clay brings the enrichment workflow demo; Genesys brings the skill-orchestrator end-to-end; co-promo to both lists; 50/50 lead split; Clay hosts; Genesys edits the recording.
- Timeline: Week 1 kickoff → Week 3–4 promotion → Week 5 webinar → Week 6 nurture.
Anti-patterns
- ❌ Partner with a competitor under the guise of co-marketing. Distribution gain ≠ trust loss.
- ❌ Skip the written structure. Lead-split disputes kill the relationship.
- ❌ Start with a research report. Too high commitment for partnership #1.
- ❌ Asymmetric partnerships (size delta > 3×). Smaller side gets more value; bigger side disengages.
- ❌ Generic "let's partner" outreach. Convert at <5%.
Integration with other skills
- Upstream:
/icp-researchdefines the shared audience;/positioningclarifies non-competition story. - Downstream:
/content-strategyintegrates partner campaigns into the calendar;/lifecycle-marketingruns the post-event nurture. - Companion:
/product-launchmay coordinate partner amplification at launch moment.
Attribution
This skill adapts patterns from coreyhaines31/marketingskills/co-marketing/SKILL.md (MIT license, © Corey Haines / Conversion Factory). Adapted to Genesys operator voice. Lane B: Genesys-internal partnerships first.
Final ship gate
Run /premortem --output before ship. See /premortem skill for the 5 execution domains (will-it-resonate / will-it-convert / will-it-stay-on-brand / will-stakeholder-push-back / will-it-degrade-over-time) and output template.
Trivial-case escape: ## Premortem\nNo failure modes — trivial change satisfies the contract for genuinely trivial outputs.